Fix the Constitution.

The rise of Obama into the White House is an amazing image to behold. A black man is now going to be President. It has an emotional effect on so many people of color, particularly black people.

And yet, it is worth thinking about whether America’s acceptance of blackness is really as complete as the election of Barack Obama suggests.

Part of Obama’s success and rise is rooted in the fact that he is not “really black,” but biracial. By biracial I mean that his parents were not both black.

Throughout the campaign you would often see images of his white mother and white grandparents. There were not really that many photos put forward by the campaign of his African father and relatives. In fairness to Obama, the white side of his family is the one that stayed around to raise him, but my point is still worth considering.

The real question is whether or not a black man or woman could become President without half of their family being white.

I feel that when white people look at biracial people, they say to themselves, well they’re half like me. Another cruder way of seeing it is “I was always potentially a wild night out on the town by my Mom from being born biracial myself.”

I guess my point, and call me pessimistic, is that a black person without white people as a major part of their family background, could not have won the Presidency in 2008.

Hopefully, I’m wrong though.

In any event, we’ve still come a long way with the Obamas.

For me, the most amazing transformational part of the Obamas in the White House, is Michelle Obama, as I’ll discuss in a future post.

Food for thought . . . self-hatin is a problem in need of attention.

Folks . . . stop hatin.

Malcolm also gives the love to black women.

Food for thought from history – whether you generally agree with the man or not.

Another clip from HBO’s the Black List:

Anybody who gives any thought to race in America and what it means, should give Baldwin your ear for a few minutes. Brilliant mind, brilliant stuff.

I’m still thinking about the words.

If you’re too busy to watch the entire thing, you should listen to Baldwin’s last question (beginning at 5:23).

It’s still unanswered.

ACLU Blog: Connecticut Supreme Court holds illegal to prevent same-sex couples from marrying. The court held:

Interpreting our state constitutional provisions in accordance with firmly established equal protection principles leads inevitably to the conclusion that gay people are entitled to marry… To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others.

A great decision, and it includes a great straightforward take away in the above quote.

I fully support the decision and the advancement of gay rights – but I ask why does it always seem state supreme courts make these decisions week before national election years – is it just me?

Anyways justice is justice, albeit ill-timed ; ).

Here’s another great takeaway from the decision:

We recognize, as the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court did in Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health, supra, 440 Mass. 309, that ‘‘our decision marks a change in the history of our marriage law. Many people hold deep-seated religious, moral, and ethical convictions that marriage should be limited to the union of one man and one woman, and that homosexual conduct is immoral.
Many hold equally strong religious, moral, and ethical convictions that same-sex couples are entitled to be married, and that homosexual persons should be treated no differently than their heterosexual neighbors. Neither view answers the question before [the court]. Our concern is with [our state] [c]onstitution as a charter of governance for every person properly within its reach.’’ Id., 312.

You can read the full decision here.

A truly great series available on HBO.